Balancing

 

If our right-hand opponent has bid, then we are in the "direct seat", we know that Partner is going to get one more shot, and so we don't have to jump through hoops ahead of him.  But, if we are in the balancing seat (LHO bid something, followed by two Passes), it's our side's last chance, and sometimes hoop-jumping is required in order to keep the auction alive.  Balancing is a very large subject, indeed, and you'll find a number of instructive examples below, though we are only scratching the surface.  Consider also studying Mike Lawrence's book on the subject.

 

                                      2nd June, 2010                                Both Vul

 

 

 

                                  December 7th, 2011                     Both Vul

 

                                    6th May, 2009                      Both Vul

 

 

                                     1st April, 2009                    E-W Vul

 

 

                                    4th March, 2009                  None Vul

 

 

                                    3rd September, 2008            N-S Vul

 

 

                                           11th October, 2006           Board 20      Both Vul

 

 

Clearly we are going to balance here, but Double is not an option holding just two cards in the unbid major.  That leaves 1NT and 2♦.

 

In the direct seat, a 1NT overcall is normally played as showing 15-18 and that is the bid we would make if it were RHO who had opened the bidding.  However, in the balancing seat it’s customary to play a lower range, the logic being that this increases the chances of (in this case) South being able to keep the bidding alive.

 

A typical balancing No Trump range is 11-14 HCP’s or thereabouts, and, if we were playing that range, this hand is a bit too good, so we’d (reluctantly) bid 2♦, though, to be honest, it’s awfully tempting to bid 1NT anyway.

 

Some players (ourselves included) like to expand the balancing 1NT range to something like 11-16.  Isn’t that a bit wide?  Yes, but there’s a useful gadget to help us cope and it’s called “Meckwell”.  Assuming that you play Stayman opposite a balancing 1NT, then the Meckwell modification works like this:

 

South    West   North   East

             1♠       Pass    Pass

1NT      Pass   2♣       Pass

??

 

Here, South makes her normal Stayman response if she is at the low end of the 11-16 range … and bids 2NT if she is at the high end of that range, regardless of her major suit holdings.  After the 2NT response, 3♣ is used as a “re-Stayman” on the way to game.

 

Armed with that treatment, with the Problem hand, we would bid 1NT in a heart-beat … we surely want to be the No Trump bidder, putting the strong hand on lead, and let’s not forget that Partner might have Qxx or Jxxx in Spades, in which case we really want to bid the No Trump first.

 

                                           29th November, 2006       Board 21      N-S Vul

 

 

What does 2♠ mean here?  Clearly it is not preemptive, if we think they can make something big we can just pass.  No, 2♠ is used to show a decent hand with a 6-card Spade suit.  How decent?  We’d suggest a hand which, given the chance, would have opened 1♠ and then rebid 2♠.  Let’s face it, we would balance with 5 Spades and paltry values, so it has to be a good idea to use that otherwise useless jump to show a better hand.  But not too good.  If the hand were a little better, we would double first and then bid Spades.

 

                                          2nd August, 2006              Board 13       Both Vul

 

 

Another two-step problem ... do we balance? ... if so, how?  Notwithstanding the vulnerability, we would balance here, letting them play in 2♥ is altogether too feeble in our view ... they have 8 or 9 trumps and around half the points, why let them buy the contract so cheaply?  If we do choose to take a call, the most obvious bid would appear to be Double.  But we prefer 2♠ ... in the absence of an earlier overcall Partner should expect a 4-card suit in this situation ... if Partner has 3+ Spades, he can pass, and if he does not he will escape to a minor (via 2NT if he wants to offer a choice, or directly to 3♣ or 3♦ if he has a clear preference).

 

Obviously, this balancing action would be much safer if we were non-vulnerable ... as it is, we'll suffer the occasional -200, especially if the opponents are sometimes opportunistic enough to make a speculative Double.  But the good news is that even if our balance puts our side on the ropes, we'll often survive when the opponents fail to double or else take the push to the 3-level.

 

                                           17th May, 2006                 Board 22      E-W Vul

 

 

Perhaps this one is altogether too obvious … with that void in their suit, East must reopen with a Double.  Newer players may be surprised that East can commit his side to the 4-level like that, vulnerable no less, with a mere 14 HCPs opposite a silent partner. 

 

Very occasionally the Double will get his side into trouble, but more often than not it won’t, there are too many ways that the bid can win … Partner may be salivating to exact a penalty … or maybe has a few values and a major suit … or a Diamond fit.  Yes, when the opponents are preempting and we are short in their suit, it generally pays to bid.

 

                                          2nd August, 2006              Board 27      None Vul

 

 

In the direct seat this would be an easy 1NT overcall, but in the balancing seat it's customary to lower the requirements for this bid, primarily to make it easier for the balancing side to crawl back into the auction.  A typical balancing 1NT range would be 10-14 or 11-15, or thereabouts, and this 16-pointer is just too good.  So Double is the only choice here.

 

Let's not to forget to extend the logic into the later auction.  For example, suppose that we do indeed double, and that Partner now bids 1♥ or 1♠.  What next?  The answer is that we must bid 1NT, showing a hand that was too good to balance with 1NT originally, let's say 16-18.  The logic is consistent, whether we are in the direct seat or the balancing seat:

    In the direct seat:              Bid 1NT with 15-18

                                               Double then bid NT with 18-19 (a hand too good for 1NT originally)

    In the balancing seat:        Bid 1NT with 11-15 (or some such range)

                                               Double then bid NT with 16-18 (a hand too good for 1NT originally)

 

                                           16th May, 2007                 Board 15     N-S Vul

 

 

It seems normal enough to balance here with 1♥, but let’s also consider a bid of 1NT.  First of all, what is your range for a balancing 1NT.  It’s usually played as weaker than a direct 1NT overcall (15-18), and a typical balancing range is 11-14 or thereabouts.  Some players expand that range quite considerably, to 10-15 or 11-16, but to make such a wide range work they incorporate a gadget called Crowhurst (better known as Meckwell in the United States).  For more on this please see the Convention Library for the article “Our 1NT Overcall”.

 

Anyway, if we were playing a 10-15 or 11-16 balancing 1NT overcall, that would be our choice.  Descriptive and limiting.

 

                                           4th October, 2006             Board 9      E-W Vul

 

 

We don’t know whether North is planning to write a memoir entitled “Crummy 12-Counts I Have Opened”, but, if she is, we might find this specimen in Chapter One.  Well, at least the suit is good, that's a good enough excuse.  But, having opened 1♠, however minimum it might be, and having prepared that reliable stand-by, the “lead-directing” defense, for the post-mortem interrogation, it is nonetheless incumbent upon North to balance here.  One just doesn’t sell out non-vulnerable in these situations, unless one looks forward to seeing South's memoir entitled “Ex-Partners Who Wouldn’t Balance”.

 

Yes, a balance is obligatory, and the most flexible and descriptive action is a Double.

 

                                           10th May, 2006                 Board 2      N-S Vul

 

 

Even though South has the best hand at the table, she has been unable to get into the auction thus far … should she pass one more time?  No, we suggest that South doubles here.  What should Partner expect from South for this Double?  Some values, of course … and yet a hand which was unable to get into the auction earlier … Heart length and Spade shortness would explain the earlier silence.

 

So, essentially, doubling here is a take-out for the minors.  Not that South is particularly looking forward to hearing 3♦ from Partner!  No, South is gambling that North’s Spades are good enough to convert the take-out Double into a juicy penalty.  And, on the actual hand, that is exactly what happens! 

 

                                           2nd August, 2006            Board 19     E-W Vul

 

 

Back on Board 13, South had a balancing problem, and now its North's turn.  The opponents appear to have an 8-card fit, because West's Redouble showed 3-card support, and East's 2♠ bid suggests at least 5.  Does this mean that we should balance?  We have the vulnerability in our favor, and probably just over half the points, but the fact of the matter is that we simply have nowhere to go.  Partner seems likely to hold 2 Spades, and to be at least 4-4 in Hearts and Clubs ... as a passed hand, over 1♠, he could have bid 1NT with a distributional hand, so there is a strong possibility that she is exactly 2-4-3-4, in which case balancing will result in us playing in a 4-3 fit at the 3-level.  No, sometimes you just have to go quietly and defend a low-level contract ... but at least your partnership can rely on its superior defensive skills to salvage a few matchpoints.

 

                                           16th August, 2006             Board 8       None Vul

 

 

First, let's back up to the opening bid of 1♣.  Anyone for a 1NT opening?  We wouldn't object too violently to that, though some might say it's a bit too strong ... 17 HCPs and a 5-card suit and those 3 Aces may add up to too much for some people, even though the hand is fillerless.

 

Anyway, we chose to open 1♣, and now we must choose our rebid.  It's a simple choice between Double and 1♠, and we much prefer 1♠.  This bid does not do justice to the strength of our hand, but then again neither would Double, that could be made on a minimum opening hand with, say, 4-1-3-5 distribution.  As neither bid conveys our extras, surely it's better to make the bid that conveys our hand-type.

 

On the actual hand, after 1♠, North would be faced with another balancing situation on the next round of bidding:

                        North   East     South   West

                                                             Pass

                        1♣        1♥        Pass    Pass

                        1♠         2♥        Pass   Pass

                        ??

Now it is clear for North to Double.  This sequence by North is quite informative ... the failure to Double earlier denies as many as 3 Diamonds, we would think, and then the belated Double showed tolerance for Diamonds ... this sounds very much like a 4-2-2-5 distribution (or perhaps 4-1-2-6 with a poor Club suit) to us!

 

                                           16th August, 2006            Board 14      None Vul

 

 

Should East balance here?  Only 5 HCPs, and all in Queens and Jacks, but you do have that lovely singleton in their suit, and you further have the safety of being non-vulnerable.  Yes, we would double here, but the bid is not without its risks.  For example, Partner could have 2-5-4-2 distribution, in which case one of two bad things might happen:

(a) He passes, hoping that you have a bit of defense for your Double, and 2♥ doubled comes home in a canter;

(b) He tries 3♦, and that goes for a large number when North doubles.

 

Well, we did say that taking action here was not without risk, but we’d do it anyway.

 

                                          23rd August, 2006            Board 29      Both Vul

 

 

What are your methods here?  More specifically, how do you play 2♣ in this situation?  There are two commonly used treatments:

            Michaels:        Some partnerships play the balancing cue-bid in much the same way as a direct cue-

                                    bid, so, if your method of choice is Michaels, then 2♣ here would show the majors.

            Very Strong:   Of course, some very strong hands are suitable for a Take-out Double, so the cue-bid

                                    would typically be reserved for hands with lots of playing strength, those which would

                                    not like to hear a Take-out Double being converted into a penalty Double … a two-

                                    suiter is quite likely in this treatment.

 

If you are playing Michaels, your treatment will come up more often, but on this hand you will be poorly placed.  You’ll be forced to double, the subsequent auction might be cumbersome … Partner will bid our short suit, we’ll have to jump to keep the auction alive, and may never get to mention our second suit.

 

If you are playing the balancing cue-bid as strong and distributional it will come up rarely, but, when it does, the resulting auction will be relatively smooth … we’d recommend this agreement:

            After a balancing cue-bid showing a strong, distributional hand, the Partner is required to takes at least

            two calls.

This agreement allows the strong hand to get both his suits into the auction.  It also allows the auction to stop short of game, so the strong hand must jump or cue-bid again to create a game force.

 

For the casual partnership, we’d recommend sticking with Michaels … it comes up more often, and it’s less complicated!

 

                                          19th December, 2007       Board 4       Both Vul

 

 

Are you going to sell out to 2♥ here?  The vulnerability is a deterrent, of course, but we’d balance anyway.  There’s a good chance that 2♠ or 3♦ will be a safe spot and defending against 2♥ is unlikely to be worth many matchpoints.

 

To illustrate the methods available for getting into the auction, let’s look at 4 hands:

Hand A            Hand B            Hand C            Hand D

♠ AT752          ♠ K6                ♠ AT7              ♠ AT75

♥ T42              ♥ T42              ♥ T4                 ♥ T42

♦ KT9              ♦ KT95            ♦ KT95            ♦ KT95

♣ K6                ♣ AT75           ♣ K643            ♣ K6

 

What would you do if you held Hand A?  The answer is that you don’t hold this hand, you would have bid 1♠ immediately over 1♥.  Because of the failure to make that overcall, there is a strong presumption that South does not have 5 Spades.  It’s not a complete certainty, perhaps South has a rotten 5-card suit and a marginal hand, but the odds are that South does not have more than 4 Spades in this auction.

 

How about Hand B?  That’s a 2NT bid, saying “Pick a minor, Partner”.  There’s not much point in using 2NT here as a natural bid.

 

Hand C is also straightforward, it’s a Takeout Double, showing something in all of the unbid suits.  Partner will pick a suit, or with, for example, 2-3-4-4 shape, will bid 2NT telling Partner to pick a minor.  Is that 3-card Spade suit a deterrent to the Double?  Not at all, some might even say it’s essential, as we shall now see.

 

This is South’s actual hand.  Anyone for a 2♠ bid?  Yes, indeed, if South is unlikely to have 5 Spades, then 2♠ can be safely bid with just four.  North will usually pass this with 3 (or more) Spades, or else bid 3♣ or 3♦ with a strong preference for that minor, or else bid 2NT, which, yet again, is pick-a-minor.

 

© BES, Inc

All Rights Reserved